Political opposites exchange places

Republican David Vitter and Democrat Foster Campbell - you don't get much further apart than that among Louisiana politicians, especially on their attitudes about government regulating commerce.

Sen. Vitter is an unbridled free enterpriser who led the opposition to the federal government's bailout of General Motors when then-President George W. Bush proposed it in late 2008.

Public Service Commission Chairman Campbell is the state's leading populist, who wants to tax offshore oil production and to lower the guaranteed profits of public utilities.

Last week, as usual, they took opposite sides on a multi-billion dollar question, but, very unusually, they traded places.

In response to Entergy's problems in restoring power to customers in the New Orleans region following Hurricane Isaac, Vitter, along with Jefferson Parish President John Young, came out with a breathtaking big-government proposal to allow parishes to expropriate or to force the sale of a utility company's assets if it "fails to perform," as determined, presumably, by government.

That massive a public intervention might sound to Republicans like the kind of left-wing scheme they would expect from Campbell, who, instead, described it the way Republicans often do his ideas. "That's the craziest thing I ever heard," he told the Times-Picayune.

Eric Skrmetta, a Republican who represents Jefferson Parish on the PSC, was more diplomatic in his response, but he shared Campbell's assessment of Vitter's ulterior motive, calling it "hyper political."

In their letter to the governor, the PSC and legislators, Vitter and Young ask, "Why should a utility be guaranteed its costs plus a profit but in most cases never EVER be able to be replaced, no matter how poorly it performs?" They reason that municipalities, some of which own their utility systems, already have this power, so parishes should have it too. They foresee the take-over course taken rarely, if at all, because "the very existence of the option--the implied threat--could only spur improvement in a utility's overall performance."

Rather than call it government intervention, Vitter posits his plan as a means "to inject real competitive pressure into the equation." Funny he should describe it so, since it would be government, with the power to replace one utility company with another, that would be picking winners and losers, which is heresy against the Republican credo.

Instead of rallying behind Vitter, some Republican legislators are wondering what possessed him. A common question asked is how would people know if a new company would put up the poles and lines any faster after a storm, and what happens if it doesn't. Besides, what company would spend billions to buy assets that it could be forced to sell?

Legislators in other parts of the state might even wonder what the fuss is about. They know that week-long power outages in the heat of summer put severe hardships on people. They know that because many in southwest Louisiana went longer without power after Hurricane Rita as did folks in Baton Rouge and Houma after Gustav. Power was out in New Orleans for longer still after Katrina, but the vast majority of the population had evacuated. So the length of the Isaac outage in the New Orleans area was a rude shock, and many took their anger out on Entergy.

Yet, even some Entergy critics say that Vitter's "implied threat" of expropriation is like using an atom smasher when what is needed is a good monkey wrench, to turn the screws on companies that are slacking off. The PSC already has the power to cost negligent utilities hundreds of millions of dollars by not allowing them to pass along the cost of storm repairs to ratepayers.

If the senator did not know so beforehand, the cool reaction to his sweeping proposal should tell him it's not going anywhere at the Legislature next spring, where it would take a two-thirds majority to put the question on the constitutional ballot.

How far his plan goes, however, may matter less to Vitter than how far it takes him. He has a knack for cherry-picking populist issues, like his support for re-importation of prescription drugs from Canada, which goes against Republican orthodoxy but has broad appeal.

If nothing else, taking a low-risk stand against an unpopular utility giant allows the senator to say he told us so when the next big storm hits, or should he jump into the 2015 governor's race, which starts at the peak of hurricane season.

- John Maginnis is an independent journalist who covers Louisiana politics.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Email this article

Political opposites exchange places

Republican David Vitter and Democrat Foster Campbell - you don't get much further apart than that among Louisiana politicians, especially on their attitudes about government regulating commerce.Sen.